Will St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke be the one who helps steer a football team back to Los Angeles?

I had dinner with Georgia Frontiere, where the Rams' owner chose to tell me about each of her seven husbands — four too many for me to make a newspaper deadline and still explain to the people of Los Angeles how she had just won approval to move her team to St. Louis.

I hopped into a waiting limo in Oakland, expecting to find Al Davis, but got a pair of Raiderettes instead. So I never did get around to meeting with Davis to discuss the possibility of the Raiders returning to L.A.

Former super-agent Michael Ovitz sent a martini to my hotel room and had Tom Cruise and Jerry West call to talk football and the prospect of bringing the NFL back to town. Ovitz also asked me not to park my Ford Escort in front of his Rockingham home so no one might think he was entertaining a poor person.

When it comes to the NFL and L.A., I find almost nothing too far-fetched. But now maybe comes the capper of them all.

If Frank McCourt chooses Stan Kroenke as the Dodgers' winning bidder, McCourt does something that Eli Broad, Ed Roski, Mayor Riordan, Peter O'Malley and so many others could not do.

He not only brings the NFL back to town, but he gives fans here the Rams again.

There is no other reason for Kroenke to bid on the Dodgers, even though there are NFL rules that prevent an owner from owning a baseball team in one city and a football team in another.

Imagine a statue of McCourt outside L.A.'s new football stadium, his arms outstretched and palms up in the hopes someone might drop a dollar or two in them.

Crazy, I know, but no more so than driving to a dog track in Tampa years ago with the daughter, her Notre Dame roommate, Rams executive John Shaw, his wife-to-be and Kroenke all jammed into a rental car.

I've seen Kroenke, who married the daughter of the co-founder of Wal-Mart, go pale losing a $2 show bet on some poky mutt. So I remain somewhat dubious he will be the last bidder standing after McCourt squeezes the very last nickel out of bidders.

But I do like the idea of greeters outside a stadium as fans arrive.

I can't imagine McCourt ripping Kroenke off, but Kroenke is the determined sort. He wanted badly to be a sports owner, and now he not only owns the Rams but the Denver Nuggets, Colorado Avalanche, Colorado Rapids and Mammoth as well as the British soccer powerhouse Arsenal.

He also owns a pair of wineries, and if you owned the Rams wouldn't you need a drink?

He has a home in Malibu, and he put together a sports TV network in Colorado, which the new owner of the Dodgers may want to do here.

If you live in St. Louis, today is the deadline for the Convention and Visitors Commission to submit a financial plan to keep the Rams.

St. Louis is obligated to make the Rams as rich as the top quarter of teams in the NFL, which is impossible given the dump they play in. If the city fails to deliver such a plan, or it's rejected by the Rams come March 1, the team will be free to break its lease and play elsewhere in 2015.

The Rams are already irritating the locals, announcing they will play a regular-season game in London each of the next three seasons even though small print in their deal with St. Louis forbids it.

When a city gets cross with an NFL franchise, well, we know how that goes around here.

The Chargers were the first choice to come here, but the Goof who owns them seems more concerned with upsetting his fan base than finding a new one.

Kroenke, meanwhile, hired a former USC football player in Jeff Fisher to coach the Rams. Fisher was the coach who steered the Oilers through their move from Houston to Tennessee to become the Titans.

Kroenke is also Denver pals with Philip Anschutz, who is working on a plan to open a football stadium here in time for the 2016 season. I wonder if the Rams could play in Dodger Stadium for a year.

Now as well as I know Enos Stanley Kroenke, who was named after St. Louis baseball players Enos Slaughter and Stan Musial, I wonder if he's the right guy for L.A.

A Denver columnist nicknamed him "Silent Stan" because he's not one to talk publicly. And I would think to be successful here the next Dodgers owner will have to speak directly to the fans.

But this week Silent Stan couldn't even come to the phone to explain to someone he's known for some time that he's bound by a gag order not to discuss the Dodgers. When someone can't say "Hello," hard to believe he's going to offer much when it comes to discussing the Dodgers' payroll.

On the other hand, it looks as if he might have no trouble saying "Goodbye" to St. Louis.

My take is the Rams stay in St. Louis. They'll play at the Dome for a few years while growing into a dominant team again, after which Stan K. can build a new stadium somewhere in the vicinity of the old Chrysler plant. He has the wherewithall to finance a new stadium without holding St. Louis hostage, particularly when one considers that the NFL league itself can help out in that regard. Think of the revenue a new stadium would bring if Stan owns practically everything lock, stock and barrel. Think he might bring the Arsenal in for a game or two? Anyway that's my Thursday morning two cents ..

-02-02-2012

QUINNtessentialTruth

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

I think its too early now to say if we will move or not. But I would say it is 75/25 with 75% chance they will stay. I do also think if they stay they will get a new stadium/dome/field.

Quick question, there is a limit to amount of sports team one can own right? That is why kroenke moved one of the other teams to his wifes name when he bought the rams, right? So if he buys the dodgers, he would have to do that again??

-02-02-2012

Truth

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

I don't believe there is a limit. Stan relinquished ownership in the Denver teams because the NFL does not allow an owner of an NFL franchise to own other major sports teams in a competing NFL city. So, Stan could not own the Rams while owning sports teams in Denver, an NFL city. The issue that has not been addressed yet (even by the NFL) is, can Stan own the Dodgers and the Rams given that LA is not an NFL city, and whta happens if/when an NFL team moves into LA. We all know that if the Rams move to LA, there is no issue. However, if the Rams stay in STL, and another NFL tem locates in LA, will Stan's Dodger ownership be grandfathered in? Meaning, sisnce he owned the Dodgers BEFORE LA became an NFL city, can he have cross ownership?

-02-02-2012

berg8309

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Actually it was NFL cross-ownership rules. You can't own a sport franchise in a different city IF that city also has an NFL team. Since he owned the Nuggest and Avs, and Denver had an NFL franchise, he couldn't keep ownership of those teams when he bought the Rams. Since LA currently has no NFL team, he could own the Dodgers there and the Rams in St. Louis.

If LA were to get an NFL team (Not the rams), owning the Rams in Stl and Dodgers in LA would violate the cross-ownership rules. You can own different sports franchises in the same city though, so a Rams-Dodgers in LA would work. It just doesn't work with another NFL team in LA.

Make sense? I typed that fast.

-02-02-2012

QUINNtessentialTruth

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Quote:

Originally Posted by berg8309

Actually it was NFL cross-ownership rules. You can't own a sport franchise in a different city IF that city also has an NFL team. Since he owned the Nuggest and Avs, and Denver had an NFL franchise, he couldn't keep ownership of those teams when he bought the Rams. Since LA currently has no NFL team, he could own the Dodgers there and the Rams in St. Louis.

If LA were to get an NFL team (Not the rams), owning the Rams in Stl and Dodgers in LA would violate the cross-ownership rules. You can own different sports franchises in the same city though, so a Rams-Dodgers in LA would work. It just doesn't work with another NFL team in LA.

Make sense? I typed that fast.

Got it, thanks Truth and Berg. I knew it had some thing like that. Both of you guys answered my question perfectly.

And yes that would be interesting to see what happens if he gets Dodgers and some other NFL team moves to LA

-02-02-2012

AvengerRam

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Anyone who thinks its as simple as IF KROENKE GETS THE DODGERS, THE RAMS MOVE TO LOS ANGELES, simply does not understand, or has chosen to be deliberately obtuse.

Under the current rules, Kroenke can own an NFL team in St. Louis and a baseball team in a non-NFL city like Los Angeles. Considering that his ownership interests range from Denver to St. Louis to London, there's no reason to presume that Stan would feel the need to consolidate all of his teams in one location.

Just another example of someone looking for an immediate answer to a question that simply can't be answered yet.

-02-02-2012

RAMFANRAIDERHATER

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Anyone who thinks its as simple as IF KROENKE GETS THE DODGERS, THE RAMS MOVE TO LOS ANGELES, simply does not understand, or has chosen to be deliberately obtuse.

Under the current rules, Kroenke can own an NFL team in St. Louis and a baseball team in a non-NFL city like Los Angeles. Considering that his ownership interests range from Denver to St. Louis to London, there's no reason to presume that Stan would feel the need to consolidate all of his teams in one location.

Just another example of someone looking for an immediate answer to a question that simply can't be answered yet.

I agree with AV... What?

Too many people are reading too much into the Dodger deal. The Dodger's franchise is way to good to pass up if you're a business man who loves owning sports franchises like Stan. The Dodger name is money waiting to happen for a good business man. And a good business man like Stan sees the possibilities associated with owning the Dodgers. I don't believe it has anything to do with the Rams situation. It's just a matter of (bad) timing. The bidding for the Dodgers and the Rams issues just happen to be going on at the same time.

And with a lot of powerful people, things just always seem to fall into place at the right time. Although the Dodger's bidding and Rams stadium problems are not connected at the moment, they could very well be in the near future and Stan would be in an excellent position to make best use of that situation. Imagine that Stan wins the bidding and becomes the owner of the Dodgers. Bringing one of his other franchises into the same area could be very beneficial I would think. He would then become one of the richest, most influential owners in all of sports. Which I think is his goal.

...and the rich would get richer.

-02-02-2012

gap

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Until I see otherwise, I see this as Stan forcing the NFL to do away with the cross-ownership rule. If he buys the Dodgers, he keeps the RAMs in St Louis, and uses that as leverage to keep the NFL out of LA until they remove the cross-ownnership rule. He would then "buy back" the teams that the league forced him to sell to his relatives. This would then open the door for another team to move to LA.

And the current deal that AEG (IIRC) is trying to do will be an impossibility, as no team besides the RAMS can move to LA if Stan buys the Dodgers. This is because any NFL team moving to LA, that isn't owned by Stan, would make Stan owning the Dodgers a cross-ownership violation. And if Stan already owns the Dodgers, the NFL could not force him to sell the Dodgers so that they could move another team in to LA.

Pure and simple, this is Stan forcing the league to remove the cross-ownership rule, and has NOTHING to do with him moving the RAMS back to LA.

gap

-02-03-2012

stvscharfe

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

I'm sorry, but I really believe that if Stan gets the Dodgers, it will be moving day for the Rams to L.A. The key to this deal is, Stan is allowed to own two sports franchises IF they're both in the SAME CITY. He buys the Dodgers (one of the most valuable teams in MLB) and then he's allowed to bring the Rams to L.A. Besides that, the guy who wants to build a stadium in L.A. is willing to sell the stadium to Stan IF he can buy a part-ownership in the Rams.

-02-03-2012

LA Rammer

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

why doesn't stan buy the dodgers and move them to st. louis... sorry i had to :D

-02-03-2012

MrOrange

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

I need a Rams fan from LA to send me a PM. I'm a bitter east coast boy and I need somebody to explain to me why I should support anything involving the Rams moving to LA or LA in general.

-02-03-2012

Fettmaster

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Under the current rules, Kroenke can own an NFL team in St. Louis and a baseball team in a non-NFL city like Los Angeles.

Say this were to happen and then the Chargers or Vikings announce they're moving to LA next year. What then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by stvscharfe

The key to this deal is, Stan is allowed to own two sports franchises IF they're both in the SAME CITY

No my man, that's incorrect. You see, according to NFL cross-ownership rules, Stan can own the St. Louis Rams and other sports franchises as long as those franchises are located in a city that doesn't have an NFL team. Prior to owning the Rams, Stan owned the Denver Nuggets and Colorado Avalanche, teams that obviously play in the same city that's home to the NFL's Denver Broncos. So Stan had or still has to give up ownership of those teams. Since LA doesn't have an NFL team, he's free to own the Rams and Dodgers.

But how long will LA remain without a team? Could Kroenke receive a grandfather clause from the NFL to own both teams? Or would he be forced to give up ownership of another one of his franchises? Or like some are speculating, could Stan move the team?

The plot is thickening.

-02-03-2012

chucknbob

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Does anyone know what the MLB's stance on this is? Can he own the dodgers and Rams If the rams are in another MLB city?

-02-03-2012

Truth

Re: If Stan Kroenke gets the Dodgers, doesn't L.A. get the Rams?

Quote:

Originally Posted by chucknbob

Does anyone know what the MLB's stance on this is? Can he own the dodgers and Rams If the rams are in another MLB city?